Embodying Social Differences

I wanted to pay closer attention to the section of Wells' reading that discusses photography as a gateway to the differentiation between social classes. In the 19th century when phrenology was introduced, it was used as a scientific form of subjugation which was used to justify the mistreatment and dehumanization of minority groups. As Wells said, "Typological classification was reassuring to the urban middle classes because its convenient generalizations helped make the mass of strangers in the city seem more familiar." People are scared of what they do not know or understand, resulting in predisposed discrimination. This method of thinking parallels the concept of group think or mob rule, in which an ideal is upheld or perpetuated due to its commonality. This type of thinking caught on because people could easily buy into the claim of a scientist saying that there was reason or justification for discrimination. It reassured the dominant class, which was the normative model for comparison. Anything outside of what was considered 'normal', i.e. white, male, middle class, etc. was to be feared. It is ludicrous to think that physical characteristics are signifiers of moral character and therefore people with what are considered abnormal characteristics should be discriminated against. Does that make the Hunchback of Notre Dame an anomaly? I found it interesting to think about identification tactics of today and how they are all still emphatic visualization - from photographs to iris scans and fingerprinting, which still aim to sort and classify people, just in less blatantly discriminative terms.